On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:39:41 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jun 19, 2007, at 2:03 PM, Rotan Hanrahan wrote:
I propose that the text that introduces an algorithm in the normative
section be phrased something like the following (based on an idea
suggested in Anne's
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:45:16 +0200, Rotan Hanrahan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the conformance section [1] of the XMLHttpRequest Object WD, you
mention:
The algorithms in this specification are generally written with more
concern for clarity than efficiency.
This suggests that more
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:11:25 +0200, Rotan Hanrahan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am concerned by subtle conflicts in the normative text. For example,
you read the following:
The value of the text response entity body MUST be determined by
running the following algorithm:
The use of MUST
, and will let the WebAPI people decide for themselves if there is
any merit in it.
Regards,
---Rotan.
From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 19/06/2007 20:26
To: Rotan Hanrahan; public-webapi@w3.org
Subject: Re: Status of algorithms
On Tue, 19 Jun
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:57:11 +0200, Rotan Hanrahan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The necessary flexibility might be achieved if the text read: The value
of the text response entity body MAY be determined by running the
following illustrative algorithm:.
There is no other way to determine it.
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
They are certainly not illustrative. They are the only way to find out
what you need to implement. You MUST follow the algorithm. Not copy it
step for step.
If you want to sort something, there are many different algorithms to do
that, you could use, for example,
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:24:21 +0200, Boris Zbarsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
My point is that the algorithms are illustrative, devised specifically
for clarity (as is pointed out in the document), yet the text also
demands that you MUST use the algorithms as outlined.
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
How about:
Conformance requirements phrased as algorithms or specific steps may
be implemented in any manner, so long as the end result is equivalent.
The problem is not with the conformance section, it is with the specific
requirements regarding algorithm use,
.
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 19/06/2007 21:55
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Rotan Hanrahan; public-webapi@w3.org
Subject: Re: Status of algorithms
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
How about:
Conformance requirements phrased as algorithms or specific
.
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 19/06/2007 21:55
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Rotan Hanrahan; public-webapi@w3.org
Subject: Re: Status of algorithms
* Anne van Kesteren wrote:
How about:
Conformance requirements phrased as algorithms
10 matches
Mail list logo
